Cassy Fiano

Saturday, May 17, 2008

Everyone knows about John McCain's brave and honorable military service in Vietnam. A lot of people know that he comes from a long line of military officers.

According to Senator Harkin, (D-IA), this is a bad thing. Not just bad, but potentially dangerous:

Republican presidential candidate John McCain’s family background as the son and grandson of admirals has given him a worldview shaped by the military, “and he has a hard time thinking beyond that,” Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Ia., said Friday.

“I think he’s trapped in that,” Harkin said in a conference call with Iowa reporters. “Everything is looked at from his life experiences, from always having been in the military, and I think that can be pretty dangerous.”

Harkin said that “it’s one thing to have been drafted and served, but another thing when you come from generations of military people and that’s just how you’re steeped, how you’ve learned, how you’ve grown up.”

A McCain spokesman said Harkin’s remarks were offensive and showed that Democrats are out of touch with Americans’ values.

“Senator Harkin’s comments are an affront to the many thousands of Iowans who have served our country so valiantly for generations,” said spokesman Jeff Sadosky. “This sort of attack shows just how out of touch Democratic leadership has become with the values that have made our country so great.”

So serving in the military at all is bad as is, but you get a pass if you've been drafted. Only an uneducated idiot or a cruel, violent warmonger would volunteer to serve in the military, right?

And gosh, what a horrible way to be raised, in a military family! Imagine -- being raised with values like courage, integrity, honor, valor, selflessness, and sacrifice. How awful!

Of course, Senator Harkin is a liberal, so he probably doesn't understand those kinds of things.

Personally, having a Marine for a father and two grandfathers who served in the Navy (one as a career), I think growing up in a military family is pretty great. The military can instill values that you won't find anywhere else. You learn things and form bonds from military service that you won't find in anything else you will do. I can't convey the respect and admiration I have for those that serve enough. It's just unfortunate that libtards like Harkin can't understand it.

This comes, of course, from the same party whose Senate Intelligence chair suggested that military pilots have little human feeling. It precedes an effort by the New York Times tomorrow, along with some of McCain’s oh-so-courageous unnamed Senate colleagues, to suggest that McCain didn’t really experience Vietnam because his five-plus years as a POW kept him from learning all of the lessons John Kerry experienced in his three months in a Swift Boat. This also comes from the same party that celebrated Kerry’s military experience while denigrating George Bush’s National Guard service. According to Harkin today, Bush would be a better candidate — right?

If the Democrats want to party like it’s 1968, that’s their choice. The rest of America grew up. People stopped drinking the New Left Kool-aid a long time ago and quit treating veterans like baby-killers and Dr. Strangelove. Tom Harkin, Jay Rockefeller, the New York Times, and a good portion of the Left apparently never stopped.

With the clock running down on a long-fought primary, NARAL Pro-Choice America leaders sent state affiliates reeling this week by endorsing Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois. It was seen as a gratuitous slap in the face to a longtime ally, and it sparked a fear even closer to home: that the move will alienate donors loyal to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

Many on this week’s conference call were stunned on learning the news, making urgent pleas for the group to remain neutral until after the June 3 Democratic primaries.

“It’s created a firestorm,” said NARAL Pro-Choice New York President Kelli Conlin, who was on the conference call. “Everyone was mystified ... saying, ‘What is the upside for the organization? And, frankly, [there was] a lot of concern about the donor base. ... There was real concern there would be a backlash.” There was a backlash, and it was swift, starting with NARAL’s own website. At last count, there were more than 3,300 comments in an electronic chat about the endorsement, the overwhelming majority of them negative. “Shame shame shame!” read one, with many correspondents threatening never to support NARAL financially again. “No more donations from me!!!” wrote another.

In Washington, two dozen women members of Congress who support Clinton held a quickly organized press conference to tout her abortion-rights record Wednesday night. Ellen Malcolm, founder of the abortion-rights women’s fundraising group EMILY’s List, sharply rebuked NARAL for its endorsement. Two former members of Congress (and Clinton supporters) — Geraldine Ferraro and Pat Schroeder — jabbed at NARAL for endorsing before the general election. “Looks like some higher ups at NARAL are trying to get jobs in the new administration ... nothing else makes sense to us,” they wrote in a joint letter.

Whoopsie.

Now, I'm not going to cry any tears over anyone disassociating themselves with NARAL, regardless of the reason. Hey, I support you wholeheartedly. But I can't really understand what they thought they'd accomplish by endorsing Obama. It seems like Hillary is the one who has lobbied tirelessly for NARAL, and as she is the one who needs the boost, why didn't they endorse her? It isn't like endorsing a candidate who doesn't get the nomination puts a scarlet letter on you for the rest of the election, or that you won't have a voice in the administration of whoever wins. I just don't see what they thought they'd gain from it.

NARAL picked the worst time to make an endorsement. Instead of picking someone early, they chose Obama with just three weeks left to go before the end of the primaries. Did they think they could help him in Puerto Rico, or believe him in danger of losing the nomination? What practical effect would their endorsement have on his ability to collect votes in the handful of contests remaining?

Not much, but obviously that wasn’t their motivation. They wanted to send a message to Hillary to get out of the race now, rather than ride out the short string of primaries left. NARAL wants to show some muscle in the party’s operations, and doesn’t mind throwing Hillary under the bus to do so. Instead, they have enraged their base of women who have seen Hillary as their champion both in this race and on the mission of NARAL itself — and see her opponent as an Obama-come-lately, an ally but certainly not someone who has done the trench work that Hillary has done over a long period of years.

Apparently, sticking by the person who has worked so hard for you for years now isn't all that important to NARAL.

But hey, who cares what their motives are? This is great for me! Let the chaos continue. Anything that can further Hillary's chances for winning the nomination is fantastic. Way to go, NARAL!

But, you know, remembering different cities in fifty-seven states is a tough job. So we shouldn't judge him too harshly for forgetting what city he's in.

The Democratic frontrunner Sen. Barack Obama of another state, Illinois, had an enthusiastic double-barreled stump introduction from two local luminaries, former Sens. Tom Daschle and George McGovern, who was an equally enthusiastic supporter of Sen. Hillary Clinton until recently. But he changed his mind.

McGovern knows a little about presidential races, having once been the Democratic presidential candidate himself way back in 1972. He lost though.

Both South Dakotans lavished all sorts of praise on Obama, according to reporters present, including The Times Nicholas Riccardi. As the large, enthusiastic crowd of some 7,000 supporters roared and waved "We can do it" signs and Bruce Springsteen's "The Rising" blared, Obama bounded onto stage, grabbed the microphone and said, "Thank you, Sioux City!"

Trouble is, Obama was in Sioux Falls.

So was the crowd, which suddenly fell silent. Where are those Southwest Airlines get-away flights when you need them?

Democrats are rebuking President Bush for saying in his speech to the Knesset, here, that to “negotiate with terrorists and radicals” is “appeasement.” The Democrats took it as a slap at Barack Obama. What bothers me is the continual reference to Hitler and his National Socialists, particularly the British and French accommodation at the Munich Conference of 1938.

The narrative we're given about Munich is entirely in hindsight. We know what kind of man Hitler was, and that he started World War II in Europe. From the view of 1938, what Hitler was demanding at Munich was not unreasonable, according to the prevailing idea of the nation-state. His claim was that the German-speaking areas of Europe--and ones that thought of themselves as German --be under German authority. He had just annexed Austria, which was German-speaking, without bloodshed. There were two more small pieces of Germanic territory: the free city of Danzig and the Sudetenland, a border area of what is now the Czech Republic.

We live in an era when you do not change national borders for these sorts of reasons. We have learned the hazards of it. But 1938 was only 19 years since Germany's borders had been redrawn, and not to its benefit. In the democracies there was some sense of guilt with how Germany had been treated after World War I. Certainly there was a memory of the “Great War.” In 2008, we have entirely forgotten World War I, and how utterly unlike any conception of “The Good War” it was. When the British let Hitler have a slice of Czechoslovakia, they were following the historical lesson they had learned 1914-1918: avoid war. War produces results far more horrible than you expected. War is a bad investment. It is not glorious. Don’t give anyone an excuse to start one.

Yeah... it wasn't unreasonable to turn over first all of the German-speaking states to Hitler. Or all of Europe. Or eventually the world. And it wasn't unreasonable to let Hitler exterminate millions of people, mostly Jews, because he thought they were inferior and unclean.

That's certainly no reason to start a war, right? I mean, Germany got screwed, so Europe deserved what that got and should've given in to Hitler's reasonable requests, and let him go on murdering millions. That would've been the reasonable course of action, I guess, since all of this was our fault, thanks to WWI, according to this douchebag. And this was to defend Barack Obama!

During a speech before the National Rifle Association convention Friday afternoon in Louisville, Kentucky, former Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee — who has endorsed presumptive GOP nominee John McCain — joked that an unexpected offstage noise was Democrat Barack Obama looking to avoid a gunman.

“That was Barack Obama, he just tripped off a chair, he’s getting ready to speak,” said the former Arkansas governor, to audience laughter. “Somebody aimed a gun at him and he dove for the floor.”

Way to go, asshat. Real classy. Joke about someone trying to kill one of your political opponents. Douchebag.

Thursday, May 15, 2008

This article on MSN annoyed the ever-lovin' crap out of me. It was a list of places you shouldn't take a girl on a date, and, well... I wanted to smack the crap out of the girl who wrote it.

Sports barsWhen we’re with you, we don’t want to compete with the big game or struggle to hear you over a crowd of drunken sports fans. We’d rather be in a place where people are less likely to bump into our chair or spill beer on the cute outfit we put too much time into selecting. Likewise, we don’t want to feel ignored by our date because he’s watching his favorite team or can’t hear us because of that old 50 Cent song blaring from the speaker by our heads. The Buffalo wings are pretty much the best part of this experience, and they better be freakin’ outstanding.

Theme parksIn life, there are roller-coaster people and there are those who get queasy looking at the merry-go-round. Find out which one your date is before you take her to the nearest Six Flags to ride the Mind-Eraser. We know you’re eager to be the manly man as we clench your arm in terror while spinning upside down in a quadruple loop. It’s just that some of us are not aching to toss our cookies in the bushes next to the churros stand while you watch. Sure, we might get to know you better while waiting in those long lines, but we’ll probably have other things on our minds if our stomachs are filled with knots and our hearts are racing in anxious anticipation—like avoiding the next date.

Chain restaurantsWe love a guy who wants to feed us and perhaps even more so a man who wants to pay to feed us. But if you take us to a place we can find in every major city where the interior always looks the same, you might as well feed us lattes at Starbucks. Fast-food joints obviously rank as the worst dinner choices, but corporate restaurants (oh, don’t make me name names… you know the ones I mean!) also lack originality and thoughtfulness. As a general rule, don’t take us to a place where we know what we’re going to order before we walk in. We’d rather be taken somewhere off-the-beaten path—where there are candles instead of fluorescent lights, and we don’t have to listen to Top 40 songs blaring from a speaker overhead. If you have no idea where those places are, remember—God created the Zagat Guide for a reason.

Gross-out comediesWe know you think the whole dinner-and-a-movie idea is infallible, but not if the movie completely grosses us out. You might find it funny when Ben Stiller is standing near a pier and a fish hook gets stuck in his cheek or when Johnny Knoxville jumps into a vat of plastic balls filled with venomous snakes—we don’t. Men and women have different senses of humor. Various studies have proven this, so try to respect this biological fact and refrain from making us indulge your Three Stooges sensibility for two hours. Your buddies may laugh, but we’ll simply be rolling our eyes.

PaintballYes, some women are members of the National Rifle Association. No, most of us don’t want to be moving targets on a date. We know you might have an urgent need to explore your inner hunter, but we’re gatherers—and those little pellets sting and leave bruises. Being shot by your date isn’t fodder for a romantic afternoon; it’s warfare.

Meeting your motherTrue, it might happen eventually, but casually hanging out with your mother — wonderful as she may be — is not our idea of a relaxing time. Neither is getting tips from her on how to find a better hairstylist or job. Sure, she might make the best fried chicken or pasta primavera on the planet, but her long, loving gaze might make us feel less like family and more like we’re on the wrong end of a long microscope—especially if you take us to meet her on the second or third date. If you want to see your mom, that’s cool. Just don’t make us a permanent fixture in her house too early in the relationship or we’ll start wondering why you’re so busy showing us off, or worse—why her opinion of us matters more than your own.

Guys, if you really like us, you should be eager to sacrifice a few testosterone-driven activities to demonstrate your thoughtfulness and consideration. Nothing reveals those qualities more than respecting our dislikes instead of trying to railroad through them. That’s not too much of a chore, is it? Show us a nice date or two, and chances are we’ll be more than happy to share those Buffalo wings with you…

Good Lord, is this chick like, the most high-maintenance girl to ever walk the planet or something?! I would HATE to be her boyfriend if I was a guy. I mean, jeez... "chain restaurants" are forbidden? I can see it now:

Girl: "Are you serious? Come on... Olive Garden?! My God. You're such an asshole."Guy: "But... I just wanted to take you out for a nice dinner... you know, my treat... "Girl - "Yeah, but you didn't even think about how I've been to this place a gazillion times. You are so insensitive. Ugh."

And I didn't realize that us women are simply too "delicate" for theme parks. We're apparently sure to be scared and sick the entire times, and couldn't possibly enjoy ourselves. Funny, I was under the impression that theme parks are a helluva good time, and I can't get enough of roller coasters. That would be an awesome date, in my opinion. A sports bar would be, too. It's great: low-key, relaxed, laid back. The food's usually good and there's plenty of entertainment. I love sports, so I'd probably be perfectly content discussing whatever game is on at the moment. But if your girl isn't, there's probably a lot to do otherwise -- play pool, throw some darts, even take the chance to teach her about whatever game that's on. Make it fun. Make little wagers on various things throughout the game, and her playful side will probably come out.

And as for the lecture about comedies and paintball, well... most girls I know loved There's Something About Mary as much as the guys I know did. And oh, no! Heaven forbid a lady participate in a manly hunting sport such a paintball and get a -- gasp!! -- bruise!!

I don't know what this chick's deal is, but usually, if a guy is taking you anywhere on his dime, I'd think you would be grateful. It may not be a dream date. It may not be a perfect night. But he's spending his hard-earned money on you, and making a sincere effort to take you on a date that you'll enjoy -- so relax and enjoy it, and stop being such a high-maintenance bitch! If you're so picky, then next time YOU can pay for the date.

Oh, and the guy one was pretty lame, too. It wasn't quite as lame, but it was close.

I'm proud of my country every time I see the flag or hear the National Anthem. I'm proud of my country every time I read about how much we've fought and sacrificed in the last century alone to defend freedom. I'm proud of my country every time I remember that no matter who you are or where you come from, you can come to America and build a better life for yourself, as long as you're willing to work hard enough. I'm proud of my country every time I visit the Duval County Veteran's Memorial Wall, where I cannot keep the grief and love I feel for her from running down my cheeks, thanks to the unbelievable sacrifice millions of American soldiers, sailors, and airmen have made for her and for freedom.

Simply put, there is not a single day that goes by when I'm not proud of my country. I love her, and I would fight for her until my dying breath. America has given so much. To say I feel pride for her is an unbelievable understatement, but it's as true today as ever.

Michelle Obama may not be able to understand why it is that so many Americans are proud of their country, and are willing to fight for her, and sacrifice for her. But it's one that's crystal clear to me, and to these Tennessee citizens, and millions of Americans everywhere.

Have you ever had one of those really annoying itches on your back, that no matter what position you contort yourself into, you just can't reach?

Well, to introduce you to the Retard of the Day, you first need to put yourself into that position. Your back's really, really itching. You can't reach it to scratch it. You try and you try, and finally, decide that you need some kind of back-scratching apparatus to really relieve that itch. So what do you use?

Hairbrush? No, not long enough. Spatula? No, too bendy. Hey, I know!! Why not a revolver??

Oh, wait, because it might go off and you'll have ended up a retard who just shot yourself? Bingo!

A Fort Worth man trying to scratch an itch on his back used a revolver and accidentally shot himself.

Jorge Espinal, 44, was drinking beer and playing poker around 3 a.m. Sunday in his home in the 3500 block of Montague Street, when he got up from the table and walked into another room, said Fort Worth police Lt. Kenneth Dean.

“He told officers he had an itch on his back and grabbed the first thing he could get a hold of, which was a revolver,” Lt. Dean said. “The gun went off."

Mr. Espinal went back and told his buddies that he shot himself. “They didn’t believe him until they saw the blood coming down his back,” Lt. Dean said.

Mr. Espinal was taken to an area hospital, where he was treated and released with non-life-threatening injuries.

Idiot.

Darwin Awards, baby. That's all I gotta say. I get the feeling this guy will be nominated for one someday.

Everyone knows Beyonce. She's had amazing successes as a singer, both with her group Destiny's Child, and as a solo artist (check out her awesome duet with Shakira, Beautiful Liar). She's done some work in movies, and has been a champion for us curvy ladies out there (hallelujah, a celebrity who eats!).

She recently decided to add "fashion designer" to the mix, with her House of Dereon clothing line. She recently released her designs for little girls, and well... I guess I can't say that I'm completely surprised.

Here's the ad that has so many people outraged:

And a little close-up:

Well, I'm not entirely sure where to start with this. Here's some of the reaction from around the blogosphere:

[W]alk through the Mall on the weekend or go to a public pool. Mothers are morons. And where are the fathers? It starts with Bratz, morphs into Hannah Montana, and then we're surprised when our little girls think it's normal to be slutty? - Dr. Melissa Clouthier

Well if that doesn’t just scream class, good taste, innocence, and childhood, I really don’t know what does. This makes me want to have many girl babies, so I can dress them up like whores and make Beyonce more wealthy than she already is. It’s a win-win for everybody.

What makes this especially touching is that I remember seeing Beyonce in an interview years ago, talking about how she was all about empowering young women to be independent, self-sufficient, and smart. I’m guessing she’s been hanging out with rappers too often and has somehow decided that the path to female independence starts in preschool and involves 5-inch stilettos, heavy makeup, and feather boas. - Rachel Lucas

As for the mothers of this new crop of Little Girls Gone Wild models, they were undoubtedly thrilled to see their daughters painted up and posing like Victoria’s Secret angels-in-training. If we’ve learned anything from Lindsay Lohan and her hard-partying mother, it’s that the Lolita-posing apple doesn’t fall far from the bosom-flaunting tree.

So, what’s next? Nine-year-olds performing stripper routines? Oh, wait. It’s been done already. I saw that very nightmare last fall on the cable TV reality show “Keeping Up with the Kardashians”—featuring the grade-school-age daughters of Olympic star Bruce Jenner strapping on stilettos and twirling around a stripper pole in their parents’ bedroom as friends and family cheered them on. Future House of Dereon clients, no doubt.- Michelle Malkin

Unfortunately, this ad and this clothing line for girls doesn't shock ME in the least. Remember what I wrote just a few short months ago about thongs and padded bras being sold at Target to seven-year-olds?

The Bratz empire is based around four dolls, but has grown into much more, with a TV series, games, and a movie. The dolls have abnormally large heads with big eyes, a tiny, upturned nose, and full lips (basically, every celebrity's plastic surgery dream), are usually dressed like hookers, with chokers, "Bad Girl" t-shirts, halter tops, feather boas, thigh-high fishnet stockings, and lace-up, high-heeled boots or stilettos. The Bratz dolls are centered around a love for all things superficial -- gossip, shopping, clothes, fashion, make-up... it's all about making sure your appearance is perfect, because that's the most important thing. Dressing up like your favorite Bratz doll is now a popular Halloween costume. At least Barbie could be a doctor, a lawyer, a teacher... Bratz dolls seem like the Lindsays, Nicoles, and Paris' of the world -- kept girls who do nothing and aspire to nothing, except to be able to party and shop to their heart's content.

...

We live in a capitalist, free market society. Parents complain constantly about the over-sexualization everywhere, but who is it that is contributing to it? An eight-year-old girl does not usually have the money to buy herself a Bratz doll, thong underwear, and shirts screaming the words "LUSCIOUS" accompanied by two cherries across the chest. Parents are the ones buying these items for their daughters. Parents are the ones letting their daughters get swallowed whole by this culture. All of this is driven by profit. If no one bought these things, then companies would stop making them because it wasn't profitable. But millions of parents nationwide are buying these products for their daughters, so companies across the market keep churning them out. It's a gold mine. If it wasn't, then they'd invest in something else.

I never could understand why parents seem so blase about letting their daughters wear shirts that say "Flirt", "Porn Star", or one I saw that proclaimed, "So Many Boys, So Little Time", why they let them buy bras when they haven't even started developing yet, why they let them become sexualized so young. I just don't get it. Maybe it was the way I was raised. I wasn't allowed to wear a two-piece bikini as a kid, much less thong underwear and bras. Even as a senior in high school, if I wore an outfit too risque, my mom would make me throw it out, even if I bought it. I couldn't wear high heels or knee-high boots, let alone hooker heels and fishnets.

...

Parents should stop being their daughters' friends, and start being their parents.

Maybe, just maybe, if parents tried being parents, we wouldn't have to worry about the oversexualization of our daughters quite so much.

Those same words are relevant to this.

I'm not going to sit here and point a finger at Beyonce for putting her name on these ridiculous clothes. That's her bad taste. That's her slutty style. I mean, come on -- is anyone surprised that a girl who dresses like this would come out with skanky clothes for little girls?

I mean, seriously -- celebrities are the most shallow, superficial, image-obsessed (and usually slutty) people on the planet. Of course the clothes they come out with will reflect that.

But who is forcing mothers to buy these clothes for their daughters? Is anything about this clothing line much different than the clothes already being marketed to young girls and tweens? Um, not really. Girls are already being sexualized at an alarming rate, and their loving parents are just sitting back and letting it happen. But it's the designers we're howling at.

Someone explain that to me, because I'm not getting it.

It's just this simple: don't buy the product. If mothers weren't buying into this brand of prosti-tot chic for their daughters, it's likely that we'd stop seeing these kinds of things. Why? Because businesses exist to make money, and if no one was buying this crap, they'd be losing profits. What a concept! If no one bought anything from Beyonce's clothing line, then the entire thing would be considered a tasteless, tacky joke and eventually, the line would stop being manufactured. But we all know that won't happen.

Because no, mothers and fathers couldn't possibly be expected to say that evil word NO to their children, so we'll undoubtedly see plenty of little girls walking around wearing this kind of crap.

It's sad that little girls aren't allowed to be little girls anymore. I mean, jeez, I would SO have been the odd kid out if I was growing up today. Check out my sexy style as a kid:

Tucked-in t-shirt. Knee-length shorts. Tennis shoes. Maybe the outfit's a little dorky (OK, a lot dorky), but I'd take that over an eight-year-old slut any day. I mean, jeez, parents. What's the damn rush? Trust me, your daughter will be more than eager to skank it up and sleep around once she gets in high school, if you're so anxious to encourage that kind of behavior.

So, we're all shocked and apalled by these clothes, as we should be. Before we get all huffed up with breathless indignation, there's something we need to remember. The people we should be questioning, the people who deserve our disgust, are the parents who buy this crap for their daughters. Shame on you.

War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.-- John Stuart Mill

Feel free to e-mail me at cassyblog@hotmail.com about anything you'd like; you can also add me on MySpace or Facebook. I welcome all questions and comments; criticism and praise. However, for anyone planning to send hate-mail: keep in mind that anything you send me may end up getting published. Thanks for reading, and I look forward to hearing from you!